Neonatal amygdalae and hippocampi are influenced by genotype and prenatal environment, and reflected in the neonatal DNA methylome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The amygdala and hippocampus undergo rapid development in early life. The relative contribution of genetic and environmental factors to the establishment of their developmental trajectories has yet to be examined. We performed imaging on neonates and examined how the observed variation in volume and microstructure of the amygdala and hippocampus varied by genotype, and compared with prenatal maternal mental health and socioeconomic status. Gene × Environment models outcompeted models containing genotype or environment only to best explain the majority of measures but some, especially of the amygdaloid microstructure, were best explained by genotype only. Models including DNA methylation measured in the neonate umbilical cords outcompeted the Gene and Gene × Environment models for the majority of amygdaloid measures and minority of hippocampal measures. This study identified brain region-specific gene networks associated with individual differences in fetal brain development. In particular, genetic and epigenetic variation within CUX1 was highlighted.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".